A common argument among deniers is "why would the Germans bother to put people in camps? why not just shoot them?" Well, slave labor is one reason. But another is that even Nazi Germany didn't have that many people who were capable of murdering unarmed people, far away from the stresses and excuses of the front line, as a matter of routine. A society only has so many sociopaths. One of the reasons for concentration camps is that they allow a minimum number of overseers to be used and keep the killing away from those of one's own citizens who might have qualms about it. This is also probably one of the reasons why so many of the camps were located in Poland. Furthermore, certain records - for example, the Posen speeches - show, if authentic, that many of the Nazi leaders didn't relish killing unarmed people. They saw it as a grim and ugly duty, a thing that had to be done for the sake of a greater cause. They had good cause to want to concentrate the killing in out-of-the way areas, and to let as few Germans as possible come into contact with it.
One thing many Holocaust deniers don't seem to understand
Other urls found in this thread:
avalon.law.yale.edu
avalon.law.yale.edu
holocausthandbooks.com
nizkor.org
holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.de
jta.org
twitter.com
Good points OP
Who is behind this post?
You mean that there are people who deny Holocaust? They clearly haven't been in Auschwitz. This place is so fucked up that it can't be just made up.
The Germans did indeed shoot many many people but it was easier and cheaper to commit mass killings by shipping millions to general locations then disposing of the bodies there than by the standard methods of mass execution
Nonetheless a surviving document from Einsatzgruppen 3 shows how many people they went around murdering in a mobile fashion. Pic related shows 137,000 civilians killed in Northern Russia from July 2nd to November 25th 1941.
The tally also divides it by types: 136,421 Jews (46,403 men, 55,556 women and 34,464 children), 1,064 Communists/Commissars, 653 mentally disabled, and 134 others
Yeah dude I went to a haunted house during Halloween and I'm also convinced that ghost exist.
A good way to understand this is to watch the movie "Conspiracy", it shows, not just how most soldiers wouldn't want to outright murder civis, but how even higher ups in the Nazi party weren't completely for it.
>(((HBO)))
>(((Mommy's boyfriend)))
A lot of them weren't for it because by 1942 it was clear Germany was going to lose the war, and they didn't want to get the rope.
It's why they went through such effort to keep the conference a secret, as they knew what was coming but still were going along with Hitler's delusional wishes. Hitler didn't realize the war was lost until like 3-4 days before he shot himself, about 3-4 years too late.
what holocaust affirmers overlook is that the whole is consistent, even when the sum of the parts are consisently reduced. Auschwitz goes from 4 million to barely six figures and somehow math is not applicable. This pattern is observed for many of the Soviet liberated facilities, but will always total 6 million even after plural reductions.
That certainly explains why, I believe, 2-3 of the people represented in that movie commited treason against the Nazi's to try and get GBP with the allies.
>>by 1942 it was clear Germany was going to lose the war
No it wasn't. Germany really didn't start losing ground on all fronts until between 1943 to 1944.
I personally like the argument that the Nazis didn't do it because they were ultra efficient and would never waste resources.
After all, nothing says efficient and pragmatic like fighting a 3 front war and spending money, time and effort on 188 tonne super tanks, jet bombers and models of the new Berlin, all while the actual Berlin is being turned into ash.
It's almost as though they arrived at the 6 million figure in a more complex way than just adding up concentration camp death tolls...
Germany was at war with the USSR, UK, and US by 1942. It was being pushed back on all fronts and Japan were already BTFO. It was clear where things were going.
To any non-retard it was clear Germany had lost, but that answers the question as to why Hitler hadn't realized it yet
>Auschwitz goes from 4 million to barely six figures and somehow math is not applicable. This pattern is observed for many of the Soviet liberated facilities, but will always total 6 million even after plural reductions.
The 4 million was never taken into account by historians. How many times does this need to be explained? The estimated death toll of auschwitz barely varied from the 50s to today.
a priori conclusions are not complex
A frequent claim some of the less gifted holocaust deniers make, is to keep pointing us to the fact that once upon a time, there was a sign at Auschwitz saying 4 million had died there, and since the 1990s it has been reduced to 1.5 million. The particularly dumb deniers go on to add: "Well, if it has been 6 million Jews all along, how can it still be 6 million Jews if the death count quietly dropped by a staggering 2.5 million?"
Even the dimmest observer will have noticed that first of all the old sign said 4 million people, not 4 million Jews, and therefore does not directly attack the 6 million Jewish death toll of the holocaust at all. Secondly, the confusion stems from the fact that there are two quite separate - and completely different - interpretations of the four million figure in this context:
1) The Western one, which is the total number of Jews believed murdered in all camps - not just in Auschwitz. This figure was given to the International Military Tribunal (IMT) by Wilhelm Höttl:
"Approximately 4,000,000 Jews had been killed in the various concentration camps, while an additional 2,000,000 met death in other ways, the major part of whom were shot by operational squads of the Security Police during the campaign against Russia."
source: avalon.law.yale.edu
...was accepted by the tribunal, and appears in the Judgement:
"Adolf Eichmann, who had been put in charge of this programme by Hitler, has estimated that the policy pursued resulted in the killing of 6,000,000 Jews, of which 4,000,000 were killed in the extermination institutions."
source: avalon.law.yale.edu
Notice that it says nothing at all about the number of deaths at Auschwitz.
2) The Soviet figure, which was the number of people (not specifically Jews!) the Soviet Union claimed were killed at Auschwitz alone. Their conclusion was based on an assessment of the capacity of the crematoria. It was submitted to the IMT in the Count Three Indictment, but NOT accepted. The Soviets, however, retained it for propaganda purposes, and it remained on the sign (and quoted by various western magazines and newspaper articles as well) until the regime collapsed in the early 90s. It was never really accepted by Western holocaust historians though, because it was based on the assumption that the Kremas functioned on a 100% duty cycle.
Proof that this figure was not accepted by Western historians is that as early as 1946, Nachman Blumental came to an informed guess that the number of Auschwitz victims ought to have been somewhere between 1.3 and 1.5 million. In the early 1950s, Gerald Reitlinger also arrived at a similar estimate of the number of victims on the basis of the number of deportees (see G. Reitlinger, "Die Endlösung", S. 522). Pre-eminent holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, who did important statistical analysis into the number of victims of the Holocaust, also supported the lower figure of 1 million (see: R.Hilberg, "Die Vernichtung der europäischen Juden", S. 1299).
Six million is the total number of Jews believed to have been killed in the Holocaust, by all means, and in all locations - not just the camps. It is based on a comparison of legitimate pre- and post-war census data, deportation lists, documentation, and cross-referencing and not by adding up the number of all deaths in all camps and then doing guesswork on the death toll of the Einsatzgruppen, death marches and so on. Though Raul Hilberg did offer a detailed tally of some 5.1 million Jewish victims, he never claimed this was it. So much for the notion that "6" is some kind of ritual, cabalistic number invented by the Jews.
Upto 1.5 million is the number of people (not specifically Jews) western historians believe died at Auschwitz alone. Its earliest appearance, as far as I can tell, is March 25 1947, when the Central Jewish Historical Committee presented an expert report to the Krakow-Auschwitz trial, stating that the total killed there was 1,500,000 - not four million.
So when Poland freed itself from communism, and the museum staff changed the sign which displayed the Soviet claim of 4 million, to the western one of 1.5 million, they were simply changing a number they knew was wrong, to one they were confident was right. This explains why the six million Jewish total remained the same - because it was never based on four million Jews having been killed at Auschwitz to begin with! If you are going to insist that the Soviet figure of 4 million was part of the 6 million, then why not also insist on the Soviet figure of 2 million dead at Majdanek? 4 + 2 = 6. If these two figures were part of the 6 million, it would mean no Jew ever died in any other camp ever, but thats not what anyone back then (including Soviets!) claimed. The holocaust death toll in its entirety, is 6 million Jews, and millions of other non-Jews, whose number varies on how one defines the holocaust, e.g. whether you include all those Soviet prisoners of war who perished during internment, Soviet civilians who perished during the Siege of Leningrad, the persecution and murder of Roma and Sinti people, homosexuals, political opponents, those considered spies, Jehovah's Witnesses and other clergymen, etc., and for these purposes Wiesenthal's 11 million figure is a good approximation, though the number is likely higher.
Does this help with your confusion, user?
Thanks. Some more data that may be relevant is that the total strength of the Einsatzgruppen was relatively small - for example, about a dozen Einsatzgruppen were deployed in the USSR, each about batallion-sized. The Nazis used a relatively small number of dedicated killers whose activity was enabled by much larger numbers of people who provided logistics and other sorts of auxiliary support but did not engage in the same level of professional killing of civiians. Of course non-Einsatzgruppen personnel did their own fair share of killing. The non-SS Wehrmacht is far from innocent. But even the Einsatzgruppen and internal German security forces, alone, were capable of genocide-scale activity. Killing huge numbers of people is easy when they are unarmed and under the mercy of a military occupation. A small number of dedicated killers, especially when supported by a nation state's organization, are capable of carrying out genocide-scale killing.
Kek. Good point.
>Neo-Nazis constantly obsess of the 6 million number
>When in fact the real death toll was well over double that once you factor in all the non-jews who were also killed
12 million people died in those camps. And that's an absolute minimum estimate.
Yep. And heck, even if the Nazis had never killed a single civilian, it's not like they would be good guys. Millions of Soviet POW were killed by the Nazis in captivity - some directly, many more through a deliberate neglect of providing food and medical attention.
I have a question, why hitler doesn't used saring gas in soldiers?
I'm going to interpret this as "why didn't the Nazis use chemical weapons the battlefield?" It was something that Hitler considered but Speer successfully talked him out of it. Speer convinced Hitler that if chemical weapons were used, the Allies would begin using chemical weapons as well in retaliation. And because of geographic reasons, the Allies would have been able to manufacture such chemicals in far greater quantities.
Minor correction; the Holocaust death toll is not limited to deaths in camps. The amount, if you're specifically talking about concentration camp victims, is significantly less, and a lot of that 11-12 million are just people who were summarily shot.
You win this round.
there was basically no slave labour in treblinka, which has one of the highest (death tolls)
oh and by the way there hasn't been a single autopsy of a gasses corpse
according to the treblinka account, a submarine engine was travelled across europe to fuel the gas chamber with diesel fumes . when the surronding countryside was full of more effecient wood gas engines
bodies were stack stories high and burnt over nigger grates made of concrete and railway lines and burnt to literal invisble dust using no accellerant (completely impossible, bodies don't burn like that, nor do teeth and bones)
treblinka has never been excavated (I don't count the smithsonian "excavation" (which dug down and found nothing but pottery and shark teeth))
the whole thing is conveniently paved over now
here's a very interesting work, all sourced:
holocausthandbooks.com
the entire treblinka narrative is based on around 6 eye witness reports.
the auschwitz gas chambers have been admitted to be reconstructions, by the museum itself
based on aeriel photos and (eye-witness) reports
during the tour you finish in the gas chamber. it's a fake. the whole thing is a lie
>Source: my ass
There's a book that I had to read for school called Ordinary Men; it's about a German reserve police battalion that was mobilized to exterminate/deport polish Jews. It includes some anecdotes and primary sources from the battalion, shows the stress involved in committing mass atrocities
after the war the coimmonly accepted method was steam, then it changed to diesel because steam was impossible, there was no evidence of this so it changed to lice gas in auscwitz, diesel from a submarine in treblinka, and I believe there is another method for the other camps
the narrative continualy changes after evidence shows it was impossible
nobody seems to know that cyanide gas was only agreed upon as the method of execution (and only for a few of the death camps) literally like a decade after it happened.
"Most gas chambers were dismantled or destroyed as the Soviet troops approached,[12] except for those at Dachau, Sachsenhausen and Majdanek. The gas chamber at Auschwitz I was amongst those blown up. It was reconstructed after the war to stand as a memorial, albeit with the entry door and the wall that originally separated the gas chamber from a washroom removed. The door that had been added when the gas chamber was converted into an air raid shelter was left intact.[5]"
from the wikipedia page
there's also youtube videos of the director of the museum admitting to it
this the the wiki source:
nizkor.org
david cole is a jew himself if it matters
So? Everybody knows that the SS destroyed most of the gas chambers themselves as the camps were about to be overrun. This was a last ditch effort to try and cover up their crimes.
Weren't a Few of them captured intact? Mostly By Soviets?
Reconstruction != fake. You're desperate to believe a lie so are grasping for straws
what do you mean?
I said the gas chamber at auscwitz was a reconstruction based on aerial photos and eyewitness reports. The other guy said I was lying so I gave sources.
The museum presents the tour as if the gas chamber you stand in at the end is literally where people died. It's not. It's fake.
How reliable are those eyewitness reports?
An aerial photo is just a picture of a roof with no context, how can we know people were gassed there?
How could anyone know what the inside of a gas chamber looked like, in order to produce a faithful reconstruction?
How do we know that pile of crumbling rocks was a gas chamber? We only have notoriously unreliable eye witness reports, from people who almost certainly never stepped a foot inside.
>Reconstruction != fake.
Well yeah, it does. When the museum presents the tour fraudulently as if you are really standing with a real gas chamber in which thousands of people were gassed, that's a fake in my book.
I'm not desparate to believe "a lie". It took me years to accept the official account was way off. I still feel uncomfortable about it.
You're just desperate to paint every holocaust denier as a stormfag jew hater.
Apparently Wikipedia is wrong. Krema I wasn't blown up.
>The Fact is also confirmed in the book by Jean Claude Pressac "Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, published by The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1989 515 Madison Avenue. On the page 157 you may read: "With part of the building converted to an air raid shelter, this is the state in which the SS abandoned Krematorium I in January 1945." Repeating what Pressac had written I told what was the nature of the adaptation works carried out by the Nazis and what one had to do to remove those changes in order to regain the previous appearance.
Like the other guy said, you're grasping at straws. Of course if you go into a museum, you're going to see some things which are reconstructions. When you go to the Gettysburg museum (excellent place BTW), you'll find that most of the cannons on the battlefield aren't "real." Does the mean the Battle of Gettysburg didn't actually happen?
> In spite of the fact that such secondary restoration works had to be done, there is an undisputable reality that the gas chamber in question is housed in the same builldin which has been existed from prewar times till now.
So you don't think the holocaust happened? Evidence.
>I don't understand the purpose of a museum
>Cole maintains that I first time admitted the allegedly unknown fact the Nazis adapted the crematorium in question in which the gas chamber were located for air-raid shelter, the fact allegedly unknown even for Museum guides. It is un truth. See enclosed copies of pages from the books which constitute the fundamental reading for Auschwitz guides. In book by T-an Sehn "Concentrat Camp Ogwiqcim-Brzezinka (Auschwitz-Birkenau) Warsaw 1957, You may read on the page 152-" In May 1944 the old Crematorium I in the base camp was adapted for use as an air raid shelter.
Unless you can post 1 webm or kids react video to Gettysburg you can't claim it happened.
>When you go to the Gettysburg museum (excellent place BTW), you'll find that most of the cannons on the battlefield aren't "real." Does the mean the Battle of Gettysburg didn't actually happen?
Of course. Its fraudulent and it spreads lies
You know what REALLY gets my goat.
I went to the Smithonian air and space museum and they had Sputnik there. Later I found out it wasn't even the real sputnik!
IT'S ALL A LIE. SPUTNIK ISN'T REAL.
Neo-nazi websites are not a legitimate source.
this is a pointless debate
I never said a gas chamber reconstruction proves the holocaust didn't happen. I said the museum fraudulently presents the chamber as if ti's the original
there is no sign there saying "reconstruction"
btw, what's the difference between an air raid shelter, and a gas chamber converted to an air raid shelter? eye witness reports?
Man, did you know the bones in Natural History museums are reconstructions too?
Dinosaurs are a fucking hoax.
you're just going to label all revisionist sources as neo nazi illegitimate sources. this is disingenuous. No professor at a 'legitimate' university would even touch the subject.
It doesn't matter anyway. Believe what you want
>air raid shelter, and a gas chamber converted to an air raid shelter?
One is underground, while the other has to be reinforced to withstand the impact.
So the accepted history of the Holocaust is "way off" because there isn't enough notice that shit is reconstructed at museums?
wewlads, that's a new one
>there is no sign there saying "reconstruction"
So what? It's not a normal practice for Museums to label what is "real" and what is a reproduction.
it would be as if the natural history museum labelled the bones as real dinosaur bones. and presented the skeleton as if you're looking at and touching a literal dinosaur skeleton.
when it turns out the bones are reconstructions based on approximations.
you're all just spinning my words this debate is pointless.
>No professor at a 'legitimate' university would even touch the subject.
>"Why aren't smart people agreeing with me! It must be a conspiracy!"
It's probably just to hype up the emotional impact.
It's Jewry, but just normal Jewry to get a few extra shekels, not a massive conspiracy.
>it would be as if the natural history museum labelled the bones as real dinosaur bones. and presented the skeleton as if you're looking at and touching a literal dinosaur skeleton.
>when it turns out the bones are reconstructions based on approximations.
This is LITERALLY what museums with dinosaur bones do, already.
Holy shit you're a moron
yes it is wtf
I'm sorry, but history isn't open to interpretation. Read things written by real authors like Timothy D. Snyder if you actually care about the truth. But more likely than not, you're just neo-nazi troll who wouldn't dare open an actual book on the subject.
they're labelled reconstructions at every museum I've ever visited
you asked for sources then insulted me for providing one
>Go to Lincoln Memorial
>It's not actually abe lincoln
>It's just some shitty statue
>It's too big to be an actual person
WTF Abraham Lincoln didn't exist
Sorry to break it to you mein fuhrer but museums DO present reconstruction of dinosaur bones as the real thing. The real bones are usually safely stowed away and are always just a small fraction of a skeleton to begin with.
Everything with how they look IS based on approximations.
Did you really think those "dinosaur bones" you were touching were real? Did you really think that was a complete T-Rex skeleton at the Museum of Natural History in NYC? lol.
You really don't seem to understand how historical preservation is dealt with.
>but history isn't open to interpretation.
lol
It' not like it's illegal or anything, right?
And it says they're reconstructions as Auschwitz when appropriate.
>Two of the three furnaces and the chimney were reconstructed (from original parts), and several of the holes in the roof of the gas chamber were reopened.
From the Auschwitz museum website
>In b4 "HURRR THEY DIDN'T MAKE IT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR IDIOT MONGOLOIDS LIKE ME"
Not in civilized countries like the US. You can deny the holocaust there all day. And looky looky, nobody there has yet to confirm your conspiracy theory
Hell in a lot of muslim countries denial is encouraged, and yet nothing groundbreaking has come from it.
>History is open to interpretation
>But MY interpretation is FACT, don't you dare question my insane conspiracy theories about the Holocaust being fake!
Literal events and numbers aren't, no. You can interpret the reasons for the holocaust but not the actual events which are indeed set in stone
>According to official historiography, several million Jews were killed by poison gas in six National Socialist camps during the Second World War. Two of these camps, Auschwitz and Majdanek, are supposed to have originally been established as normal concentration camps, but later served as ‘extermination camps. as well, in which the able-bodied Jews were used in forced labor, while those unable to work were gassed. Furthermore, as the official the historical version would have it, there were four ‘pure extermination camps,’ namely Treblinka, Sobibór, Beec, and Chemno (Kulmhof), serving the exclusive purpose of annihilating Jews. Except for a handful of ‘labor Jews,’ who were necessary for keeping the camp in operation, all Jews transported there, regardless of age or state of health, were murdered without any record being made of them.
I'm out. There's no point even discussing this. It's like debating with religious people, they wont even entertain opposing sources.
>Go to Magic Kingdom
>No Magic
>Not a Kingdom
REEEEEEEE
>civilized countries like the US
I was just fucking with you but somehow you managed to dig yourself deeper, what the hell mate.
A tenured professor can't be fired. The fact that Holocaust denial has never survived academic scrutiny is very telling.
?
You misunderstand, it's presenting the official account in order to debate it. The entire book is in opposition to this narrative.
it's illegal in a lot of countries.
it's social and career suicide in all others.
>tfw he found out dinosaur bones weren't real and is going to go cry at his childhood memories being all lies
That's the whole point. Nobody ever claimed that all six million Jews were gassed. Many were simply shot. Many were starved to death or worked to exhaustion. Disease also played role in causing deaths. You can't dispute the 'official' narrative because you don't even have the basic facts straight. Go read Bloodlands and don't come back until you're finished.
Not him, and not a holocaust denier, but the statement "several millions were killed by gassing" is not inconsistent with mainstream historiography of the holocaust. Treblinka killed about 900,000 or so, and Aktion Reinhardt got about 2 million between the four camps, also overwhelmingly from gas.That's several million right there.
I don't necessarily agree with criminalizing Holocaust denial, but I understand the logic behind it. Fraud is illegal, and Holocaust denial is basically a form of fraud, it kind of makes sense that it would also be illegal. If a person is deliberately spreading false information about a well-documented historical event such the Holocaust, then that's not okay.
Nice. How about this? Have you read it?
holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.de
>mainstream historiography
Give me names of credible historians who say that all Holocaust victims were killed in gas chambers. You can't because they don't exist. Anybody who has read even the most basic overview of the subject will tell you that Holocaust victims died in many different ways such as exhaustion, starvation, disease, firing squads, as well as gas chambers.
That is not what I said. Please re-read my post. You'll notice that my "gas count" only comes up to about 2.9 million, not the 6.
you've never been to auschwitz have you?
I think the Holocaust almost certainly happened, but I don't think your logic there is quite sound. The reason being that it's only fraud if the person making the statements is aware that they are false. A Holocaust denier who genuinely believes that the Holocaust didn't happen isn't committing fraud. Also, I think fraud would often require some sort of business transaction beyond selling books. I don't think that writing a book full of lies, for example, and selling it, is usually considered fraud - although in some cases it probably is.
Jewish Holocaust LARPers are more concerned with the number. Also the gentile death tolls have no historical basis. a prominent holocaust scholar Simon Wiesenthal revealed this was a propaganda ploy to entice gentile attention. Even other jews thought this was an onerous addition to canon. Jews are committing their own variety of Holocaust denial by insisting their lives matter more.
jta.org
>Indeed, say those close to the late Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal, its progenitor, it is a number that was intended to increase sympathy for Jewish suffering but which now is more often used to obscure it.
>The “5 million” has driven Holocaust historians to distraction ever since Wiesenthal started to peddle it in the 1970s. Wiesenthal told the Washington Post in 1979, “I have sought with Jewish leaders not to talk about 6 million Jewish dead, but rather about 11 million civilians dead, including 6 million Jews.”
>The “5 million” has driven Holocaust historians to distraction ever since Wiesenthal started to peddle it in the 1970s. Wiesenthal told the Washington Post in 1979, “I have sought with Jewish leaders not to talk about 6 million Jewish dead, but rather about 11 million civilians dead, including 6 million Jews.”
Yehuda Bauer, an Israeli Holocaust scholar who chairs the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, said he warned his friend Wiesenthal, who died in 2005, about spreading the false notion that the Holocaust claimed 11 million victims – 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews.
“I said to him, ‘Simon, you are telling a lie,’” Bauer recalled in an interview Tuesday. “He said, ‘Sometimes you need to do that to get the results for things you think are essential.’”
I hope you don't think this is the only evidence we have.
This is more about what was the holocaust and what wasn't. How many people of other ethnicities were exterminated by the Nazis like Jews?
He is right. Jews were the main target. It's very likely that more than 5 million gentiles were killed by the Nazis, but they weren't systematically exterminated (for example victims of anti-partisan actions from Ukrainian or Belarussian villages or men killed during pacification of Lidice aren't part of the holocaust).
Hollywood doesn't count.
Germans actually killed many more non-Jewish Russians in a shorter period of time than they did Jews, yet nobody on /pol/ ever seems to question the logistics of that when 6 million Jews is JUST IMPOSSIBLE
really makes me think
12 million is absolute minimum estimate. Fuck off with this "11 million" garbage.
>You can't dispute the 'official' narrative because you don't even have the basic facts straight.
What are you on about? I never claimed all 6 million jews (+ 5 mil gentiles) were gassed, neither did the book.
What the fuck are you on about?
You're debating something nobody said.
The book itself is entirely about treblinka anyway. The official account is something in the region of 750 - 900 thousand were gassed there.
I don't even know what your point is.
>You're debating something nobody said.
That applies to yourself.
the mentally handicapped were systematically exterminated, political dissendents, gypsies, and many criminals who whose crimes were believed by the nazis to be a sign of a genetic disorder, including convicted homosexuals
Hehehe
So, you're saying that most holocaust deniers would have been euthanized in Nazi Germany?
This guy can't even do the Nazi salute right.
>when jewish narrative ison par with nazi ideology